It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Lose Your House, Lose Your Vote!

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 01:43 PM
News like this on used of government power so blatantly anti constitutional and what is the people affected doing about it?

That is what I want to see next, any party that is behind a despicable behavior like this one is not short to tyranny, specially those that are directly involved in this campaign against voters.

I will like to hear what Mr. McCain has to say about this.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 01:48 PM
The general term for this is "caging". It is a Karl Rove tactic (IMO there is no word in Elvish, Entish or the tongues of Men bad enough for Rove).

And he does not limit this to those that have lost their homes, but is also targeting active duty military stationed overseas... like Iraq.

Check out the video here.

So much for supporting our troops, eh?

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 01:53 PM
reply to post by jpm1602

What in the world do hanging chads & Jeb Bush have to do with ineligible voters voting, "vote early and vote often" by having voters register at several different addresses, and overall shenanigans involving the recently deceased being registered and having votes cast in their names?

Locker was shocked at the sheer magnitude of the number of fraudulent votes and the fact that fraud occurred in every single Chicago precinct.[21] More than 3,000 votes had been cast in the names of individuals who were dead, and more than 31,000 individuals had voted twice in different locations in the city.[22] Thousands of individuals had supposedly voted despite being incarcerated at the time of the election, and utility records showed that some individuals who voted were registered as living on vacant lots.

Nice job of obfuscating the issue, jpm. There may have been accusations of widespread voter fraud in 2000, but there was proven voter fraud in 1982. Big difference between hanging chads & people registering at multiple addresses for the purpose of recieving multiples of their own vote. I'd think you'd be just a little concerned when there's clear evidence that some people find themselves to be so self important they feel their vote should count for more than anyone else's... guess I'd be wrong to think that, though.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 01:58 PM
reply to post by DimensionalDetective

What the hell are you talking about?

If a home is foreclosed, it's bank owned, if it's bank owned NO ONE LIVES THERE. OBVIOUSLY .. if someone DOES vote from that address they don't really live there, and thus, commit voter fraud?

How is that hard to understand?

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 02:02 PM
Does anyone who comes along to read on this thread know anything about 'Absentee Ballots'??

I haven't researched yet, but could be a possible solution?

Certainly I expect details state-by-state (edit here) will vary. But in this age of the Internet and E-Mails couldn't the information be easily disseminated?

Even the 'poor' and disenfranchised could certainly afford a few stamps to mail in a ballot. It's just, the info needs to be put out....many may not even realize this option.

[edit on 9/10/0808 by weedwhacker]

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 02:05 PM
I'm sorry birdman you are either going to have to type slower or use smaller words.
Everyone has an SS number right?

Go on that.

See they are putting us at our own throats already. Just where they want us.

[edit on 9/10/2008 by jpm1602]

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 02:06 PM
reply to post by burdman30ott6

burdman, I think everyone has heard of voter fraud of the type you mention, especially in the Chicago area. ( sign of organized crime there? No, don't see any...)

Anyway, if you ask what 'hanging chads' have to do with this discussion, I'd ask you what an election in 1982 has to do with the upcoming Presidential election of 2008?

Talk about a diversion....

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 02:16 PM
reply to post by jpm1602

Now we're on to social security numbers? I'm sorry, dude, but I honestly am not following you. It seems like you're just wildly flailing and throwing stuff against the board in hopes something will stick. What is it about what I have said regarding voter fraud as it relates to the need for a valid address & voter identification at the polls that you disagree with? Let's start there and work our way out into the far reaches of the ether after we've at least started on the same page.

reply to post by weedwhacker

The 1982 election fraud was an example of why measures mentioned in the OP are needed whereas the hanging chad issue has absolutely NOTHING to do with people's addresses (aside from the fact that apparently some folks in certain districts lack the physical strength to punch out a perforated chad using a stylus.) It doesn't have anything to do with the 2008 elections as much as it has to do with an increase of voter fraud related to invalid addresses being used by voters in the past to cast more than one ballot. It isn't just the 2008 elections, it's every election that will happen in the future that is impacted positively by any measure taken to reduce or, dare I dream, eliminate fraudulent voter practices.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 02:22 PM
hmmm... here now is the actual sub headline(?) on this article right now (9/10-12:20p) not sure what it was when you read it DD...

Michigan Republicans plan to foreclose African American voters

The chairman of the Republican Party in Macomb County Michigan, a key swing county in a key swing state, is planning to use a list of foreclosed homes to block people from voting in the upcoming election as part of the state GOP’s effort to challenge some voters on Election Day.

What's interesting I do NOT read anywhere in the article where they are being discriminative against the blacks. ??

why would the even be posting that..

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 02:23 PM
You know what burdman. Don't go away mad. Just go away. OMS, totally agree. Disenfrachised gi's surely wouldn't fit in with the Rove mindset. What's not to follow? We are all Americans. We SHOULD have all social security numbers if legal regardless of zip code. And I am flailing. Right.
Sure diebolds funky puters can sort out a few SS's right?

Burdman. You want to go. We can go. But I will maintain my best at civility.

[edit on 9/10/2008 by jpm1602]

[edit on 9/10/2008 by jpm1602]

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 02:28 PM
reply to post by burdman30ott6

Yes, yes burd.....agree with you 100% about eliminating voter fraud of all kinds. My point kinda was 1982 was not a Presidental Election year.

Perhaps you know more, but was the fraud in Chicago in 1982 limited to local district/county seat elections, or did it filter up to Congressional seats??

Just to finish up here, 1982 is pretty far removed.

I (and many others) are more concerned about possible dirty tricks being played right now, this year....with the allegations of past the GOP.

2000 is a lost cause....too long ago, but rumors abound.

2004....should be investigated. In fact, a very revealing documentary on HBO titled 'Hacking Democracy' pointed out serious problems in Cayungha County, in name one instance.

I highly recommend every concerned American view this film.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 03:03 PM
Hey guys, I think we're losing sight of the big picture here, it's not about skin color (or race as some put it), it's about people who don't make enough money or are going through hard times or are just bad with money in general, people who "owe" money.
It's always about the money, and if it's not about the money, it's about power, if it's not about power, well then I'm not too sure what it is about then, cause it all adds up to those two things.
Lets always keep in mind the big picture, the grand scheme, the main goal that the NWO have, it's not about "R vs. D", that's just more devisivness, to break apart the strength of the true American patriotic unity, remember R&D are two sides of the same coin. It's what I like to call the football game mentality, everyone fights and cheers for there own side, all the bickering and hatred in turn distracts us from the big picture and moer important issues.
Besides, your vote doesn't count, tell me, how does someone get minus 1,600 votes?
THe voting machines that are used now are very easy to hack as this video shows, your vote doesn't matter other than the fact that you cast a vote for the machine to count, then the person chosen to win adjusts the votes to show him or her to be the winner, simple.
I encourage anyone who believes that you actually have a say in who gets elected, to watch this video.

Hacking Democracy

Google Video Link

THings are getting bad folks, but it's a very interesting time we live in to say the least.


posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 03:23 PM
This news is very unsettling. While I can understand the need to make sure that fraud does not occur during an election, I’m not so sure this is the best way to go about doing it.

What about those people who lose their home to foreclosure and are forced to take up residence in a motel? Would they be able to re-register using the motel’s address? Or how about those that live out of a mobile home, or maybe their car? How are these people going to re-register?

Hopefully there is some mechanism in place that won’t prevent people such as these from voting.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 03:26 PM
Absolutely correct Jimmy. We have taken this out of context to a degree.
That is why I am so gosh darn mad I missed the deadline for putting in for an absentee ballot.
That is the only true/best way to get a vote in. Hardcopy. Election fraud is a felony. No one, at least not many, will tamper with that.

My point entirely tho mine not well spoken DC. It is as if the lower class, foreclosed upon, homeless are not entitled to the same dignity to vote.

Thank you!

[edit on 9/10/2008 by jpm1602]

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 03:27 PM
reply to post by Open_Minded Skeptic

What happen to the absentie Ballot used by military personnel and their families? I used one a couple of times.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 03:28 PM
reply to post by jpm1602

I see what you were saying now. You just posted "Everyone has an SS number right?" and didn't complete that with "why not use that as a voter registration?" my bad. Anyway, my SS card from 1976 says "NOT TO BE USED FOR IDENTIFICATION" on it very clearly. I couldn't tell you if my kids' cards still say that off the top of my head, but I'd think if that policy had officially changed it would have made some news somewhere. Obviously our SS numbers have become a defacto identification system thanks to credit card companies and such, but that doesn't mean it would be legal to make them a requirement for voting. I'm sure the "SS number makes you a slave, here's how to break your chains... " crowd would scream bloody murder if the numbers were made mandatory for voter registration. Imagine the conspiracy theories around that one!

reply to post by weedwhacker

Not in '82, that was mostly centered around the governor race. However, Chicago has had other incidents which did involve national elections, including a flap about ineligible voters voting for JFK (thanks to Mayor Daley's guarantee Kennedy would win the city at any cost). Like you said, organized crime has always run Chicago and the criminal in charge for most of the last 60 years has been named "Daley."

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:14 PM

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
Anyway, my SS card from 1976 says "NOT TO BE USED FOR IDENTIFICATION" on it very clearly. I couldn't tell you if my kids' cards still say that off the top of my head, but I'd think if that policy had officially changed it would have made some news somewhere. Obviously our SS numbers have become a defacto identification system thanks to credit card companies and such, but that doesn't mean it would be legal to make them a requirement for voting. I'm sure the "SS number makes you a slave, here's how to break your chains... " crowd would scream bloody murder if the numbers were made mandatory for voter registration. Imagine the conspiracy theories around that one!

Ah, but it is used as identification!
It's not a legal form of identification, but every place I go to apply at needs it, they ask for two forms of identification, DL and SS.
At my parents pawn shop, for anyone to be able to pawn ANY item, they need to have a SS for us to file, that's because it is and ID, though not a legal one, it's still considered an ID for some reason, knda like our money, it's not real money, it's not redeamable for the gold in Fort Knox, if I caim up to Fort Knox to reclaim my gold with dolars, I'd probably be shot in the head. We have phoney money, it goes quite nicely with our phoney elections.
Here's something for everyone to chew on for a while.
Who's really voting in the elections? Ever notice that the canadate with the most delegates wins? What if the majority from that state does not agree with whom the delegates choose? THe same goes when both POTUS's are running, the people don't choose, the electoral caolleges do, plus, even if there were no electoral college, there would still be fraud because of the voting machines. Let's face it folks, we have no choice, if everyone decided not to vote, then the people who are running now would still be running and Obama or mcCain would become president, it doesn't matter what "We the People" want, the whole election thing is just some big show to fool the poeple into thinking they actually have some sorta say over there own lives and to keep us distracted and fighting agianst each other.


posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:19 PM
Typical,election year tatics y'all although we all know voting for A or B does not change one single damn thing the Elites of world will continue to treat us as serfs if nothing is done soon.

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:20 PM
Crapola burdy. Go try to buy a car a house. What do you need? Your SS.
Now who is flailing.

I want free and fair elections for everyone regardless if they are living under a bridge. The SS system would be the most accurate in my eyes.
Forgot. It would also weed out illegal immigrants from casting a poll.
They don't want that. Nuh uh.

[edit on 9/10/2008 by jpm1602]

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 05:04 PM

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
Obviously our SS numbers have become a defacto identification system thanks to credit card companies and such, but that doesn't mean it would be legal to make them a requirement for voting.

What part of this did you miss? I agree with your idea, but according to the law it isn't legal as a form of voter ID. I could care less who's bastardized the system to make our SS number a unique identifier and fair game for service requirements, the bottom line is it is illegal for the government to require a SS number for reception of services not related to social security. In fact, the statutes say that ANY time a government agency asks for a person's social security number, it also must state that it is not mandatory the person disclose that information except in cases directly related to the SS sytem (ie: social security payments, food stamps, etc). I'm not flailing about anything here, I'm merely professing a reasonable expectation that the government actually uphold it's own laws and statutes regarding social security numbers, including the law that states they are not to be used by the government as a national ID. Obviously that system has already been compromised, but that isn't a valid excuse to eliminate it and further compromise the integrity & spirit of the law.

Jimmy: The gold issue is a little different as you're comparing a monetary system which was publically and openly removed from the gold standard by Nixon. In order for the two to be comparable, Congress would have to pass a legislation removing the provision in the Social Security number system that clearly states it is NOT to be used as a national ID program. It is comparing a broken fiat currency system to a badly compromised, but not yet fully broken, social security setup.

The bottom line for both you is that whenever issues like national ID cards or the real ID policy, either of which would instantly fix this voting loophole easily, come up all hell breaks loose and people scream about losing the freedom of privacy. I don't entirely disagree with that assessment of the situation, but I gotta say you cannot have your cake and eat it, too. Something here has to give and we're either going to have a scenario in which our privacy is violated, a system such as the one in the OP which has the chance of disenfranchising voters, or a continuance of the status quo which has demonstrated past instances of voter fraud and compromised election results. SOMETHING HAS TO GIVE. That's my main point here. We don't live in Mayberry, Georgia where Sherriff Andy Taylor holds the polling place door open for everyone, greeting them by name because he knows everyone in the town personally, and Aunt Bea & Opie have a table of fresh cookies & lemonaide setup outside to refresh all the voters as they leave the polls anymore. We're over 300 million people now and it is impossible to prevent voter fraud without taking some drastic steps that would have been unthinkable when the election system was first instituted by our founding fathers & the 2 or 3 million citizens we had at that time.

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in